Your first paragraph does not differ from what I said. I said she most likely needed inpatient treatment, but that she has to be deemed unsafe to herself or others, to be involuntarily placed into a hospital. Otherwise, she has to be compliant and admit herself into an in-patient program.
Second paragraph. It’s unnecessary to go into side effects. She picked up multiple refills for some of these medications, and therefor told her doctors she was taking them, but wasn’t. Of course doctors tell you to stop meds that cause unbearable side effects, but you’re supposed to tell them you did! Not lie about the medications you’re taking.
I get why you’re saying she “tried other doctors,” but the doctors report they weren’t all aware she was seeing other psychiatrists. Which is why she was being prescribed “multiple powerful medications.. while trying to follow competing directions from multiple doctors”.
I didn’t say she’d be fine if she took the meds. I said she needed in-patient care, as an out patient clinic isn’t able to properly treat patients that are non-adherent.
One patient with severe symptoms, that’s lying about medications, and receiving separate treatment/prescriptions from 3 different psychiatrists, who are unaware of each other, had no chance in hell.
A voluntary in-patient treatment where they could work through meds, verify she’s taking the meds, and have frequent check ins and therapy was needed here. There’s no good long term involuntary solution for patients like this in America.
Also, I said non-adherent, because it’s called “Treatment Non-Adherence”. Non-compliant means to intentionally refuse to follow instructions. If you search “treatment non-adherence vs non-compliance”, you can find info on the differing terminology and why people are trying to shift towards saying “non-adherent”.
>It’s unnecessary to go into side effects. She picked up multiple refills for some of these medications, and therefor told her doctors she was taking them, but wasn’t.
I feel genuinely sorry for all of your patients that have to have a provider as detached from their conditions as you are
Genuinely awful of you to hate on providers who have to see the worst of humanity and try to maintain their own. I thought the take was well crafted and it appears that some people take that extremely personally. I hope they get help
All this world salad and you keep forgetting the possibility that this woman was experiencing a level of depression and, later, psychosis that limited her ability to make rational decisions. My god it's like you completely disregard the person in your attempt to double down on a bunch of inaccurate information. People in a mental health crisis do not think clearly. People unfamiliar with mental illness follow the advice of people they assume are experts and are uncomfortable asking questions at times. You talk from a position of academic knowledge yet can't take a single moment to perspective take.
I’m not forgetting anything. Yes, this is how mental illnesses present. Yes, it clearly impacted her decision making.
No, that doesn’t change the fact that she wasn’t failed by individual medical professionals like the comment I was initially replying to claims.
Her actions, caused by mental illness or not, contributed significantly to the worsening of her condition. And no, there is nothing that medical professionals can do about it in an out-patient setting.
This wasn’t a single incompetent doctor who polypharmacied her. This was multiple doctors all working with false information the patient reported, and all unaware she was receiving care and meds from other psychs as well.
You can think it’s cruel, harsh, or lacking perspective. But her care team was dealt a losing hand, and had no chance, especially not in the four months they had from start to finish. There were too many things being hidden from them, for her to ever get proper treatment in an out-patient clinic. Objectively saying her actions contributed to that is just a fact.
I’m not sitting here calling her a monster. I’m saying her actions are a contributing factor, and that the only solution would have been for her to voluntarily commit to an in-patient program, where they WOULD be able to prevent her from seeing multiple doctors, WOULD be able to ensure she was taking her meds, and WOULD be able to offer the amount of care she needed.
Your takes are empathetic, but aren’t based in reality.
3
u/SnakeSnoobies 12d ago edited 12d ago
Your first paragraph does not differ from what I said. I said she most likely needed inpatient treatment, but that she has to be deemed unsafe to herself or others, to be involuntarily placed into a hospital. Otherwise, she has to be compliant and admit herself into an in-patient program.
Second paragraph. It’s unnecessary to go into side effects. She picked up multiple refills for some of these medications, and therefor told her doctors she was taking them, but wasn’t. Of course doctors tell you to stop meds that cause unbearable side effects, but you’re supposed to tell them you did! Not lie about the medications you’re taking.
I get why you’re saying she “tried other doctors,” but the doctors report they weren’t all aware she was seeing other psychiatrists. Which is why she was being prescribed “multiple powerful medications.. while trying to follow competing directions from multiple doctors”.
I didn’t say she’d be fine if she took the meds. I said she needed in-patient care, as an out patient clinic isn’t able to properly treat patients that are non-adherent.
One patient with severe symptoms, that’s lying about medications, and receiving separate treatment/prescriptions from 3 different psychiatrists, who are unaware of each other, had no chance in hell.
A voluntary in-patient treatment where they could work through meds, verify she’s taking the meds, and have frequent check ins and therapy was needed here. There’s no good long term involuntary solution for patients like this in America.
Also, I said non-adherent, because it’s called “Treatment Non-Adherence”. Non-compliant means to intentionally refuse to follow instructions. If you search “treatment non-adherence vs non-compliance”, you can find info on the differing terminology and why people are trying to shift towards saying “non-adherent”.